Who pays?: Care for illegal immigrants must be shared

Published 6:30 am, Monday, November 30, 2009

To this short list of frequently superheated political rivalries, we would add a third that is gathering force. It is the scrum over the related issues of how immigrants here illegally should be counted in the upcoming census and who should ultimately pay for the medical services they require.

This clash of views defies the ideological boundaries that so clearly define the other two. It is more geographic than political, pitting mostly northern states that are losing population and do not have large cohorts of undocumented residents, against border states that are growing rapidly, have larger illegal populations and so must shoulder more of the costs of services to this population.

It has been playing out in two arenas: the Census count and the health care reform debate. No surprise: This is about power and money. No surprise, too: Texas finds itself in the middle of both.

The developing census fray is a battle to keep congressional seats being waged by states that are losing population and thus stand to lose representation in Washington. Their principal argument is that those here illegally should not be counted even though, historically, the census count has been universal. Using this arithmetic, these states would avoid losses in representation at the expense of high-growth states such as Texas. Since the number of Senate and House seats up for grabs is fixed, this is a zero-sum game.

The matter of who pays for health care for illegal immigrants has been partially settled in the reform debate continuing in the Senate: The federal government will not. That satisfies most conservatives and vexes many liberals, but it leaves a huge unanswered question for all: Who does pay?

With the nation's largest group of uninsured, and a burgeoning group of illegal residents, Texas has an obvious and enormous stake in the outcome of this fight.

We believe history and fairness argue persuasively that responsibility for caring for those here illegally must not be left only to the region most affected. The burden must be shared.

We would argue this side in the matter even if Texas were on the other side of the argument. Avoiding a fractured approach on these important and related issues goes far beyond simple fairness: It is foundational to the continued health of our democratic union.